Daniel and Kelly’s Extraordinary Universe - How to use the whole galaxy to hear huge gravitational waves

Episode Date: June 29, 2023

Daniel and Jorge break down the recent discovery of huge gravitational waves by NANOGrav, and what it means about supermassive black holes.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an I-Heart podcast. December 29th, 1975, LaGuardia Airport. The holiday rush, parents hauling luggage, kids gripping their new Christmas toys. Then, everything changed. There's been a bombing at the TWA terminal. Just a chaotic, chaotic scene. In its wake, a new kind of enemy emerged, terrorism. Listen to the new season of Law and Order Criminal Justice System

On the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. It's important that we just reassure people that they're not alone, and there is help out there. The Good Stuff podcast, season two, takes a deep look into One Tribe Foundation, a non-profit fighting suicide in the veteran community. September is National Suicide Prevention Month, so join host Jacob and Ashley Schick as they bring you to the front lines of One Tribe. tribe's mission. One tribe saved my life twice. Welcome to season two of the Good Stuff. Listen to the Good Stuff podcast on the Iheart radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Do we really

need another podcast with a condescending finance brof trying to tell us how to spend our own money? No thank you. Instead, check out Brown Ambition. Each week, I, your host, Mandy Money, gives you real talk, real advice with a heavy dose of I feel uses. Like on Fridays, when I take your questions for the BAQA. Whether you're trying to invest for your future, navigate a toxic workplace, I got you. Listen to Brown Ambition on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcast. Your entire identity has been fabricated. Your beloved brother goes missing without a trace. You discover the depths of your mother's illness. I'm Danny Shapiro. And these are just a few of the powerful stories I'll be mining on our upcoming 12th season of family secrets. We can

continue to be moved and inspired by our guests and their courageously told stories. Listen to Family Secrets Season 12 on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey, Daniel, what's the biggest science experiment ever built? Well, the large Hajon Collider is pretty big. It's 33 kilometers around. That is pretty big, I guess, for human scale, but compared to the universe, I mean, the universe is huge, right? That's true. And I guess astrophysicists use the whole universe as an experiment when they, like, watch black holes collide. The whole universe is an experiment. What are the results? They're pretty universal.

Are they positive or negative? We have only one data point so far, so I think it would be presumptuous to make any conclusions. What's a hypothesis for the universe? It's awesome or not awesome? It's bonkers. I guess you use data from the whole universe, but usually you only detect things with a small telescope, right? Or a small particle collider? Yeah, the kind of eyeballs we build are usually small, even when we're observing really large things.

But there are some really clever approaches that use like the whole galaxy as a detector. What is that experiment called? Because it's so gargantuan, of course, they use the word nano in the title of the experiment. What? I guess it's nano compared to the size of the universe? I can't defend astronomers when it comes to naming their experiments. But you can defend particle physicists? You need to defend anyone in science or how they name things.

I'm going to plead no contest. The experiment says no. and the author of Oliver's Great Big Universe. Hi, I'm Daniel. I'm a particle physicist and a professor at UC Irvine, and I think the universe is pretty well-named. Apparently not, because there's something called the multiverse. See, I think if you have to put something in front of it later, it wasn't well-named.

Oh, wow, like Superman is not well-named because he's a super version of a man. Well, he's special, but if you have to sort of redefine what that is, like if you had to later name him ultra-superman, then maybe you didn't name him. in well the first time. Multi-superman. Maybe there's a universe where Superman was well-named. Or physicists named their experiments in easy to understand ways. That would be like a super physicist.

But anyways, welcome to our podcast, Daniel and Jorge, Explain the Universe, a production of I-Hard Radio. In which we use our definitely not super brains to try to understand the super mysteries of the entire universe. We hope that everything out there in the universe can be described by simple mathematical, recipes that make sense to our mammalian brains. And we do our best to apply those rules to the whole universe to see where they work, where

they break down, and where we can explain all of them to you. Yeah, because it's amazing that our tiny little brains can understand the universe that we can look out into the cosmos to get data and figure out how things work. Fortunately, the universe likes to reveal itself sometimes. Sometimes we have to be clever and build really interesting little apparatuses to like smash particles together or balance balls against each other in order to extract some information from the universe. We like concoct special setups that we hope will reveal deep truths about the universe. But not everybody gets to do that. Not everybody gets to build their own experiments. Some

people have to go out there and find experiments happening in nature. Yeah, because science is a continuing story and there are new things being learned every day and new ways to look at the universe being discovered every day. And so this week, there was a very special news about a new experiment that just revealed the data it's found. That's right. After analyzing 15 years' worth of observational data, the nanograph experiment has just made a dramatic announcement about their fantastic new discovery. You might have seen it on the news. It's sort of a big deal for this community of astrophysicists. It's literally sending waves through the cosmological community.

But hopefully the results aren't wavy or shaky. It's a bit of a treacherous territory because, as we all know, claims of the discovery of gravitational waves have either been verified and led to Nobel Prizes or have been debunked and led to some quite red faces in the cosmological community. And so this week, there was a big announcement by an experiment called nanograph. Now, Daniel, is that an acronym? Or did they just like the word nano? You know, I think the answer that is yes on both counts. It is an acronym. It stands for North American Nanohertz Observatory for Gravitational Radiation.

So they both like the word nano because it's in their title and it's an acronym. Wait, what? It's a recursive title? Like the word nano is in the acronym Nano? Exactly. And because Nanograv is one of these really clever devices that uses the entire galaxy as a detector for gravitational waves, you might think that they would choose something which describes the scale, the grandeurve. the grandeur of that experiment.

But instead, they've chosen nano, which reflects the very short frequency of these gravitational waves. Yeah, I saw that you said the word nano-hertz. I guess that's the frequency of gravitational waves that they've detected. That's right. The huge scale of the galaxy allows them to measure

really long wavelength, low-frequency gravitational waves that other gravitational wave detectors, LIGO and Virgo and all of those, could never see, giving us a whole new, window into what's going on in the universe. So today on the podcast, we'll be tackling the question. How did the nanograph experiment use the galaxy as a detector? Now, did they ask the galaxy's permission before they did this?

We've been over this before. The universe has no right to privacy inherently, man. We can ask whatever question we want. Is it in the fine print or are we going to get sued later? I checked with our legal team. they're fine with it. We have a legal team? I'm the legal team, yeah.

I think that means we don't have a legal team. Last I check, you're not a lawyer, Daniel. That is correct. Do not take any legal advice for me. So this is one of those large physics collaborations. And I guess nano sounds small because we're used to associating the word nano with distances, right, like nanometer as being super tiny or the scale of atoms and things like that. But here, it sort of refers to frequency, which actually is sort of like the inverse kind of of our intuition a lot of times, right?

And so nano here actually means big. Yeah, that's right. You have to think about waves wiggling, right? And waves that wiggle at really high speed, things like gravitational waves, which move at the speed of light, have a connection between their frequency and their wavelength. Just the way light does. So very high frequency light has very short wavelengths. Very low frequency light, like radio waves, has longer. wavelengths. And the nanograv experiment is looking for huge gravitational waves, gravitational

waves which dwarf the size even of our solar system. And so they have to look for very, very low frequency, very tiny frequencies, nanohertz, which means like a frequency of one times 10 to the minus nine. Yeah, because I guess when you hear the word like gigahertz or megahertz, it's a super high frequency. It happens really fast and very short wavelengths. But if you hear nanohertz, that means that it's like a super low frequency. Like it takes years and years for a wave to go by, maybe. That's right. One nanohertz means one wiggle every 30 years.

Whoa. And so they recently announced a big result after a long time that they've been at this using their technology to detect gravitation waves. And this week they made the announcement, right, which made the news. That's right. And they've been hinting at this for several weeks that they have something very big to share. And people have known that they were going to have. enough data to say something interesting for a little while.

We covered them on the podcast a few years ago when they had very preliminary data that didn't have yet conclusive results, but we were very excited to hear what they were going to have to say in a few years. And that day is today. So let's dig into what their result was and how this experiment works and how they use the whole galaxy basically as a detector. So what they're looking for are gravitational waves, which you have to remember are not a wave like a wave in water, that they have a lot of of similar mathematical properties. Gravitational waves are waves in space itself.

General relativity tells us that gravity is the curvature of space, which really just means you're changing the relative distances between points in space. And so gravitational waves are like ripples through space where things get closer together and further apart, closer together and further apart. Like space itself is oscillating. Yeah, because we know space isn't just like the emptiness of the universe. It's actually sort of like a thing, right? You can bend it and squeeze it and curve it, right?

Yeah, that's exactly right. And those features of space are what give rise to our sense of gravity. If space was totally flat and smooth, there had no curvature to it, then things would just move through it in straight lines that look straight to us. But because space has this sort of invisible curvature to it, things in freefall tend to follow the curvature of space, following those curves and bends and wiggles, which to us look like something is pushing on it to make it change. direction. That's kind of the Einstein view of the universe, right? That gravity is not a force that pulls on you, but it actually kind of bends space time around you to make you move in certain ways. That's right. That's general relativity in 15 seconds. Done. In nanotime. Nano relativity. Nano science podcast. But yeah, it's kind of this idea that space kind of bends, right? And it can

wiggle, especially when you move masses through it. Exactly. And we know that Einstein improved on Newton's idea of gravity. Newton had the idea that gravity was a force and Einstein replaces it with this concept of space being bent. But there's another important consequence of Einstein's update to Newton's idea, which gives us these waves, which is that gravitational information is not instant. According to Newton, if you had deleted the sun from the universe, you would instantly feel across space and time the absence of the sun's gravity. But Einstein tells us that if you delete the sun, that information takes time to propagate space doesn't like snap back instantaneously everywhere in the universe there's propagation of information and you can think of gravitational waves sort of as the propagation of

information the same way that if you wiggle an electron you make wiggles in the electromagnetic field which we can think of as photons if you wiggle the sun or if you move any massive body you make wiggles in space which we can think of as gravitational waves yeah it's interesting you call it the propagation of information. It's sort of, I guess, like if you stand in the middle of the field and you scream, it's going to take a while for that scream to get to places. Man, what a dark example. Why are you standing in the middle of fields and screaming?

Is this like some new performance art? Yeah, I'm screaming with joy, I guess. The fact that nanograph has discovered has something interesting this week. Yeah, maybe what we've actually discovered is aliens all across the universe screaming in their fields. Yes, but you're exactly right. information always takes time to propagate, and that includes the curvature of space time. So anything that wiggles, anything that's accelerating in the universe is making gravitational

waves. Now, gravity is a really weak force. So when you accelerate your arm up and down, you're technically making gravitational waves, but they're super duper weak. So in order to see gravitational waves, we tend to need really, really high masses undergoing huge accelerations, which is why the target for seeing gravitational waves are typically things like black holes swinging around each other super duper fast the moments before they merge. It's interesting, just going back, you described it as to how information about it propagates. I guess it's sort of like if the sun suddenly moved a meter to the right, it would take

some time for us and the gravity we feel from the sun to feel that shift in the sun, right? And then if the sun went back to its original position, it would take a little bit of time for us to feel that it went back to its original position. And so that kind of going back and forth is kind of what you can call a gravitational wave, right? It's like the effect of the sun through gravity. Oh, the effect of the sun propagates. Mm-hmm. If you're holding a string and your friend, a mile away is holding a string and they wiggle their end of the string,

you're not going to feel your end wiggle instantly. It's going to take a while for that wiggle to travel down the string. If you wiggle the sun, it changes the curvature of space and it takes a while for that wiggle to get to Earth. Those are gravitational waves. So I guess you could describe it two ways. It's like it's the sun bending the space around it, or it's also you can think of it as the effect of the sun through gravity being kind of changing over time. Yeah, I think those are both accurate.

I tend to think of it the first way. That's the Einsteinian way. It's changing the curvature of space time around it. Gravity is an effect of that curvature. So gravitational waves sort of made the news maybe like five, I think. I want to say five maybe years ago. That's kind of when they entered the popular culture because that's one. when we started to be able to listen to them, right,

through an experiment called LIGO. That's right. We had strong hints that gravitational waves were a real thing. Decades before that when we saw neutron stars orbiting each other and their orbit decayed in exactly the way you'd expect if they were losing energy to gravitational radiation. But the first direct proof was observations by LIGO and Virgo in 2016 of black hole mergers giving off these gravitational radiations

using this incredible bravura technique of these these lasers underground between mirrors kilometers apart looking for variations in the distance between these mirrors of one part in 10 to the 20. So that was really a very spectacular confirmation that gravitational waves are a real thing in our universe. Yeah, we know they exist and they're pretty awesome because they tell us a lot about these huge events going out there in the cosmos. But apparently these things only tell us about a very maybe narrow window of things that can

happen with gravitational waves out there in the universe. Exactly. Ligo and Virgo are sensitive to gravitational waves of a certain frequency, basically because of their size. Ligo and Virgo can only really see gravitational waves that are about the size of their detector. The gravitational wave was much, much bigger than it wouldn't have an observable effect on their detector. It would like wiggle too slowly. So Ligo and Virgo are built to be able to see stellar mass black holes, like black holes of 10 or 20 or 30 or 40 times. the mass of our sun emerging. And they've seen dozens and dozens of those.

It's very, very exciting. But they can't see things like super massive black hole mergers, which are predicted to happen when galaxies collide. And they also can't see like echoes from the Big Bang itself, which would leave gravitational waves with huge wavelengths. Interesting. All right. Well, let's dig into these other kinds of gravitational wave events

that can happen out there in the universe and how the nanograph experiment has apparently maybe seen some of those. So let's think into that. But first, let's take a quick break. December 29th, 1975, LaGuardia Airport. The holiday rush, parents hauling luggage, kids gripping their new Christmas toys. Then, at 6.33 p.m., everything changed. There's been a bombing at the TWA terminal.

Apparently, the explosion actually impelled metal glass. The injured were being loaded into ambulances, just a chaotic, chaotic scene. In its wake, a new kind of enemy emerged, and it was here to stay. Terrorism. Law and order, criminal justice system is back. In season two, we're turning our focus to a threat that hides in plain sight. That's harder to predict and even harder to stop. Listen to the new season of Law and Order Criminal Justice System on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

My boyfriend's professor is way too friendly, and now I'm seriously suspicious. Well, wait a minute, Sam, maybe her boyfriend's just looking for extra credit. Well, Dakota, it's back to school week on the OK Storytime podcast, so we'll find out soon. This person writes, my boyfriend has been hanging out with his young professor a lot. He doesn't think it's a problem, but I don't. trust her. Now he's insisting we get to know each other, but I just want her gone. Now hold up. Isn't that against school policy? That sounds totally inappropriate. Well, according to this person, this is her boyfriend's former professor and they're the same age. It's even more likely that

they're cheating. He insists there's nothing between them. I mean, do you believe him? Well, he's certainly trying to get this person to believe him because he now wants them both to meet. So, do we find out if this person's boyfriend really cheated with his professor or not? To hear the explosive finale, listen to the OK Storytime podcast on the IHeart Radio. out Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcast. I'm Dr. Joy Harden-Brandt Bradford. And in session 421 of therapy for black girls, I sit down with Dr. Athea and Billy Shaka to explore how our hair connects to our identity, mental health, and the

ways we heal. Because I think hair is a complex language system, right? In terms of it can tell how old you are, your marital status, where you're from, you're a spiritual belief. But I think with social media, there's like a hyperfixation and observation of our hair, right, that this is sometimes the first thing someone sees when we make a post or a reel is how our hair is styled. We talk about the important role hairstylists play in our community, the pressure to always

look put together, and how breaking up with perfection can actually free us. Plus, if you're someone who gets anxious about flying, don't miss session 418 with Dr. Angela Neil Barnett, where we dive into managing flight anxiety. Listen to therapy for black girls on the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcast. or wherever you get your podcast. Culture eats strategy for breakfast. I would love for you to share your breakdown on pivoting. We feel sometimes like we're leaving a part of us behind when we enter a new space, but we're just building.

On a recent episode of Culture Raises Us, I was joined by Volisha Butterfield, Media Founder, Political Strategist, and Tech Powerhouse for a powerful conversation on storytelling, impact, and the intersections of culture and leadership. I am a free black woman who worked really hard to be able to say that. I'd love for you to break down why it was so important for you to do C. You can't win as something you didn't create. From the Obama White House to Google to the Grammys, Belicia's journey is a masterclass in shifting culture and using your voice to spark change. A very fake, capital-driven environment and society will have a lot of people tell half-truths.

I'm telling you, I'm on the energy committee. Like, if the energy is not right, we're not doing it, whatever that it is. Listen to Culture raises us on the iHeart radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. All right, we're talking about the recently announced results of the nanograph experiment that have to do with gravitational waves, big gravitation waves. That's right, and not to take anything away from life. in Virgo. It's really impressive that they saw anything at all. I mean, I remember having the opportunity to join those experiments when I was picking graduate schools. And I thought, those guys are

never going to make that work. And, hey, that's not the first Nobel Prize that I've missed out on. You've had several. Haven't we all? I mean, there's this thing in research where you have to sort of make a gamble. Like, is this going to be a fruitful thing to do? And part of it depends on your smarts and your hard work. And part of it just depends on the universe. Is there something there to discover. You build this new kind of telescope and use it to look out into the world. Is there something there for you to see? Ligo and Virgo were definitely lucky because there are a lot more black holes out there than we thought. Well, aren't you sort of assuming that if you had joined that collaboration, they still would have discovered gravitational waves? I mean, aren't you sort of

assuming something there? Yeah, you're right. I might have poisoned the entire process. Or maybe it would have happened much faster. Who knows? We'll never know. Or never. Who knows, right? No, really get to open those other doors and know what your other lives might have been. You need like a superhero movie to explore the multiverse. But we all do make these choices as scientists to say, I'm going to devote my life to this one particular way to maybe learn something about the universe. Cool. Well, we're talking about the recently announced results from the nanograph experiment, which is a big collaboration of many different places, right? Not just in North America.

I mean, the name is North American Nanohertz Observatory, but actually they use, I think, from all over the world. Well, nanograv uses Eresibo and the Green Bank telescope in West Virginia and the very large array in New Mexico. But you're right there are definitely Pulsar observatories all over the world in Australia and in Europe and in China and there are other competing collaborations. So nanograv represents like the North American slice of the world. And so we were talking about earlier how nanograph looks for gravitation waves

in different wavelengths of gravitational waves than LIGO and Virgo. That's right. Now Grav is looking for something much, much bigger than LIGO and Virgo is looking for. And something much bigger than LIGO and Virgo can even see. Something important to understand is like when black holes merge, the ones that LIGO and Virgo do see, they're emitting gravitational waves during the entire merger. But LIGO and Virgo can only see it at the very end because it speeds up and gets shorter wavelengths.

And that's what LIGO and Virgo can see. So they're only seeing like the last little bit of that merger when it's in their little window. Now, is that because of some sort of frequency limitation or is that because when those black holes merge, that's when the gravitational waves get really big, right? When they're closing in on each other and circling each other really fast, that's when there's a lot of acceleration by those masses and that's when maybe we get waves that we can detect here on Earth. Yeah, it's both factors. The amplitude is too small during the earlier part of the merger and the frequency is wrong. Ligo and Virga are sensitive across a certain frequency range and it's limited by a couple

of things. One is just the size of their detector. If your detector is only a few kilometers long, you can't detect changes over light years, right? There's like no variation across your detector. Wouldn't be easier though? Like if you, you know, like a slower wave, wouldn't your detector be able to catch those better if it had the same amplitude? Well, think about in terms of the distance. Like it's much harder to measure the curvature of the earth if the earth is much, much bigger. than your ruler, right? Like to us, the earth looks almost flat. You can't even really detect the curvature. And so detecting small changes in the curvature is really hard. But if you're like the little prince and you're on a planet where like a planet is basically the size of your ruler,

it's much easier to measure the curvature and the changes in the curvature. So here and now we're like sitting on a huge wave. If the wave is like the size of the galaxy, there's no way that your little two kilometer ruler is going to be able to measure any change in that wave. Unless the change is really big, right? Like the amplitude of those low frequency waves, we would be able to detect them, but maybe we don't get those here. Yeah, if it's big enough, then you can detect it in any way. But there's another factor, which is noise suppression. These things have to be able to distinguish real gravitational waves from other kinds of wiggles. And because LIGO and Virgo are on Earth, there's seismic noise. And that seismic noise tends to be lower frequency. And so it sort of creates

a wall that LIGO and Virgo just can't see beyond. Okay. So then, nanograph is a different experiment from Nigo and it uses a totally different technology and method, right? They didn't even sort of have to build really a detector. They just sort of used existing radio antennas that we have, right? Yeah, they both use existing sources of radio waves, meaning pulsars scattered through the galaxy and existing telescopes that can see those radio waves. So it's really just like a clever combination of stuff that's already out there. It's really one of my favorite examples of like just ingenuity in physics. Yeah, it's pretty cool.

And so the idea is that they're using pulsars to detect kind of how the whole galaxy reacts to a gravitational wave, right? Yeah, that's exactly right. They want to see really big gravitational waves on the scale of the galaxy. And so they want to see the galaxy itself sort of change shape. Like what LIGO and Virgo do is they have this big L they construct with mirrors and they see a chain shape. They see one side get shorter, another side get longer. The whole thing oscillates. So nanograv and the other pulsar timing arrays want to do the same thing for the whole galaxy.

But they can't like go out there and, you know, build lasers and mirrors that are on the scale of the galaxy. So they're just watching the pulsars and they're using very precise timing measurements from these pulsars to measure how the galaxy itself is squishing. Well, I mean, come on. They could build space lasers if they wanted to. Who doesn't want to, right? I mean, when I go out in a field and scream, I'm screaming, let's build space lasers. Yeah, I'm going peop, pew, pew, pew. Let's do it.

But this is really awesome because it takes advantage of the universe as sort of a natural set of clocks. These pulsars are really cool, fascinating end point of stars. You have stars out there that are burning bright and turning their fuel into light. And then eventually they collapse with like a type two supernova. And they leave behind this core, this very, very dense object, a neutron. star, which is something that has like a 10 kilometer radius, but weighs as much as our sun. Yeah, I think we've had one or a couple of episodes about pulsars and neutron stars. They're not burning like regular stars, but they are giving off a lot of light, right?

Because they are still really hot. They are definitely still hot because they're super dense, but there's no fusion going on inside of them. So they don't glow in the typical wavelengths. Sometimes you can see x-rays from cracks on their surface. But what we're interested in this case is the beam that they emit along their magnetic north and south poles. They generate some radiation from like motion of charged particles on the surface, on the crust of the neutron star. And they have this very strong magnetic field which slurps those charged particles in that radiation sort of up the north pole and down the south pole.

Creates these massive beams of radiation along the north and south pole of the pulsar. Now this happens with every neutron star or only some neutron star. have this beam of radiation going out of its poles? Not every neutron star is a pulsar, and we do not understand very well both the source of the radiation. You think maybe it comes from a combination of the rotation of this object

and the charged particles on the surface, and we don't really understand very well the source of incredibly strong magnetic fields from neutron stars, but not every neutron star spins this way and has these magnetic fields and is a pulsar. Or can we see it, right? Because I think the idea is

that you have this neutron star. It has a magnetic field. It's shooting out basically like radiation beams out of its poles. And it's also spinning. The whole thing is spinning sort of like a lighthouse, right? And the magnetic north pole is not aligned with the spin. So the magnetic north pole and the beam sweeps across the universe. Yeah, I guess it's sort of like when you spin a top on the floor and it starts to slow down, it starts to kind of spin in a kind of wiggly fashion, right? And so if it has like a flashlight at the top of the top, then that flashlight is going to kind of sweep around sort of like a lighthouse. Yeah, well, these guys aren't wiggling. Like they're spinning very, very regularly. But the flashlight is sort of offset from

the axis of spin. So it's sort of like you're spinning around. If you held the flashlight straight up, it would always point in the same direction. But if you held the flashlight at an angle from the axis where you're spinning, then it's going to sweep around the room and light up different corners. So that's what's happening with the pulsars. The angle. of radiation is different from the angle of the spin of the star. But I guess what would make the magnetic axis be different than the spin axis? Yeah, I wish I knew. It's the same on Earth, though, right?

The Earth's magnetic North Pole is not the same as our spin axis North Pole. Right. And that's because the stuff inside of Earth is spinning in a kind of weird way, right? Yeah, and again, not something that we understand very well. And the Earth's magnetic field even flips every once in a while, as does the Suns. So that's a whole murky area of research we don't understand very well. well. But something that is amazing and it makes the physics that nanograv is doing possible is that the whole thing is super duper regular. It doesn't wiggle a lot. When this thing spins, it spins at a very

specific rate. And when a pulse reaches Earth, it reaches Earth very, very regularly. Like the time between the pulses is extraordinarily predictable. I guess what makes it so predictable? I guess just because it's an object in space spinning. And so therefore it's pretty regular. It's very dense. It's very high energy. I guess it's just not interfered with a lot, you know. In principle, everything is predictable, but some things are more complicated because they are chaotic. They're like multi-object systems. But here you have an intense source of radiation and an object that's sort of isolated. It's the leftover core of this star. Okay, so that's a pulsar, which is a kind of neutron star that has its magnetic axis,

aske you from its spinning axes, and so therefore we can sort of get hit by its radiation beams sometimes, or regularly like a clock. These, are kind of spread all over the galaxy, right? Yeah, that's exactly right. And they vary in their frequency. Some of them spin super duper fast. These are called like millisecond pulsars, which means that it's spinning so fast

that the time between pulses is in the order of milliseconds, which means the whole neutron star spins around thousands of times per second. That's wild. It's really incredible. And by looking at the pattern of the timing, we can extract a lot of information about what's going on near that neutron star. So you're saying the frequency, it sort of depends on the kind of the physics of that star, what's going on inside of it.

Exactly. And you can watch one of these things for a long time and learn what its frequency is. And then if that frequency changes, if you notice like, oh, wait, there was a longer time between these last two blips, that tells you something about what's going on between you and that neutron star. If, for example, a huge gravitational wave wiggle through the galaxy, it would make some of these neutron stars further away from us and other neutron stars closer. And so it would vary the timing pattern of those neutron star pulse arrivals. Because it's making the star further and pushing it away from us and then towards us. Or because it's sort of affecting the, you know, like the path that the light has to travel as it gets here. What's the difference between those two?

Like you could maybe have a gravitation wave happen in the middle and it might not move necessarily the pulsar, but it might affect the photons that are on the way. This is really similar to the way we think about the expansion of space, you know, how the universe itself is expanding. Gravitational waves have that same effect. They expand or contract space. And in the same way, you can think about it in two different ways, like the literal distance between us and the object is increasing

or that it's expanding the photons as they're moving between here and there. Fundamentally, those are the same picture mathematically. To me, the most intuitive way to think about it is that it's literally increasing the distance between us and the pulsar. And so it takes longer for those photons to arrive. That's a pretty cool idea. I guess you're sort of listening to the blips coming from this pulsar. Like it's going beep, beep, beep, beep, beep.

And if the frequency changes, like it suddenly gets really fast and then really slow, then you know that something happened maybe to the distance between here and that pulsar. And that change in the distance could be a gravitational wave. Exactly. And for an individual pulsar, lots of things could do that. Like we actually have discovered planets orbiting pulsars by how that planet has tugged on the pulsar and changed that series of blips. But what we're looking for here are correlations among many, many pulsars. So they're looking through the sky for lots and lots of these examples and they want to see an overall effect where a bunch of pulsars are squeezed towards us and a bunch are squeezed away from us.

And there's a very specific predictions made by two physicists, hellings and downs that predict a very particular kind of shift in the pattern. of pulsars that would come from gravitational waves. And that's what nanograv and the other arrays are looking for. So I think you're saying like if you look out to a whole bunch of pulsars out there in the night sky and you see sort of a ripple go through all of these different frequencies of light that you're getting from these pulsars, then you know that maybe a gravitational wave kind of spread out there in space. Exactly.

And these could be gravitational waves from like the mergers of super massive black holes, things that could have been washing over us, basically aren't. entire existence, but we could not detect that even LIGO and Virgo could not see. So this is like opening a new kind of eyeball to a new kind of frequency of gravitational wave nobody's seen before from a different kind of source that nobody's heard from before. That's pretty cool. And so I guess how many pulsars did nanograph look at for this latest set of results? So nanograph has been looking at 68 pulsars and studying them for 15 years. So that's a good amount of data. And as you say, they're using existing facilities, but they still have to, like, occupy time on those facilities.

They're not general purpose telescopes that listen to the whole sky. You're going to, like, point the Green Bank telescope at the right part of the sky to listen to a pulsar. So it has taken a significant amount of our sort of astronomical resources that we could have spent listening to other stuff. Oh, you mean like we don't listen to all 68 pulsars at the same time. We have to kind of go through them one by one. Yeah, exactly. And so you're pointing all your telescopes to the first pulsar. measuring its frequency, going to the next one, going to the next one, 60 over to those.

And then you, I guess you cycle back around and you start with the first one again and you do that for a long time. Yeah, you need lots of hours and they observe each one monthly. So they know roughly the pattern of these things and they sort of cycle through them. And these pulsars are very faint. So you can't always hear them very well. So you need lots of hours to sort of like light these up. In an An Anagram, even though it's trying to use the whole galaxy as an observatory, it's only still

really sensitive to the ones within a few thousand. thousand light years of Earth because the limitations just of like hearing these things. They're very faint sources. And I think you have to do it for a long time, like you said, because these waves are so slow, right? Like you said they have a period of maybe 30 years, 15 years? 30 years. Yeah, exactly.

And so these are very slow moving things. And so to see slow moving things, you need data over a large period of time. It's hard to measure slow effects over a very short time period. The longer your lever arm in time, the better you're able to see effects that are very slow. And specifically, things that would give gravitation of ways that are so big and so slow, 30-year period, those are very special events in the universe, right? Like, they don't just happen all the time. Or maybe they do, I guess that's part of the question.

They don't just happen all the time, but they are very slow events. So when you have like two galaxies merging and then they each have like a super massive black hole that's like millions to, up to 10 billion solar masses, they don't merge instantaneously. They dance around each other for like, you know, sometimes 25 million years before they actually coalesce, which means these things are generating gravitational waves for 25 million years. And so while galaxy mergers aren't happening all the time nearby, their radiation does last for a long time. And so just like LIGO, I guess we're looking for the moment where these black holes are right

right before they smushed together, right? Because that's when they spin around each other super duper fast and cause big waves in the gravitational fabric of space and time. Yeah, but nanogram is sensitive to them well before they actually hit each other. So we can listen to almost any part of that. And the current results from nanogram,

they do see these galaxy-sized gravitational waves, but they can't pinpoint individual collisions. It's sort of an incoherent superposition of mergers all over the nearby part of the universe. I imagine it's hard because these poles Pulsars are different distances from us, right? So, like, some of them are maybe 100,000 or, I don't know, 50,000 light years from us. And so, like, the data you get from them, they come from kind of different times in the universe, don't they?

Yeah, that's right. All the pulsars that we're looking at are a few thousand light years from Earth, but they definitely take this into account. But again, the events we're looking at are very, very slow moving. Meaning, like, maybe there's our two supermassive black holes merging somewhere in the universe, but they've been doing it for, you know, thousands and thousands of years. And so if you detect all of your pulse source kind of wiggling at the same frequency, maybe they come from the same event. Exactly.

But again, nanograph can't pinpoint individual events, not yet at least. What they see so far is totally consistent with a lot of gravitational waves adding up from lots of supermassive black holes merging. Cool. Well, Daniel, you got to interview one of the scientists that works on this nanograph collaboration, Professor Kiara Mingarelli. and so you have an interview with her. That's right.

I had a lot of fun chatting with her. Cool. So when we come back, then you will interview Professor Kara Mingarelli, who is part of the nanograph collaboration, and she'll talk about

some of the results and what that means for her and for the scientists that worked on it and what that means for our knowledge of the universe. But first, let's take another quick break. December 29th,

1975, LaGuardia. airport. The holiday rush, parents hauling luggage, kids gripping their new Christmas toys. Then, at 6.33 p.m., everything changed. There's been a bombing at the TWA terminal. Apparently, the explosion actually impelled metal, glass. The injured were being loaded into ambulances, just a chaotic, chaotic scene. In its wake, a new kind of enemy emerged, and it was here to stay. Terrorism.

Law and order criminal justice system is back. In season two, we're turning our focus to a threat that hides in plain sight. That's harder to predict and even harder to stop. Listen to the new season of Law and Order Criminal Justice System on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. My boyfriend's professor is well. too friendly, and now I'm seriously suspicious. Well, wait a minute, Sam, maybe her boyfriend's just looking for extra credit.

Well, Dakota, it's back to school week on the OK Storytime podcast, so we'll find out soon. This person writes, my boyfriend has been hanging out with his young professor a lot. He doesn't think it's a problem, but I don't trust her. Now, he's insisting we get to know each other, but I just want her gone. Now, hold up, isn't that against school policy? That sounds totally inappropriate. Well, according to this person, this is her boyfriend's former professor and they're the same age. And it's even more likely that they're cheating.

He insists there's nothing between them. I mean, do you believe him? Well, he's certainly trying to get this person to believe him because he now wants them both to meet. So, do we find out if this person's boyfriend really cheated with his professor or not? To hear the explosive finale, listen to the OK Storytime podcast on the Iheart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. I'm Dr. Joy Harden Bradford.

And in session 421 of Therapy for Black Girls, I sit down with Dr. Othia and Billy Shaka to explore how our hair connects to our identity. identity, mental health, and the ways we heal. Because I think hair is a complex language system, right? In terms of it can tell how old you are, your marital status, where you're from, you're a spiritual belief. But I think with social media, there's like a hyper fixation and observation of our hair, right?

That this is sometimes the first thing someone sees when we make a post or a reel is how our hair is styled. We talk about the important role hairstylists play in our community. the pressure to always look put together and how breaking up with perfection can actually free us. Plus, if you're someone who gets anxious about flying, don't miss Session 418 with Dr. Angela Neil Barnett,

where we dive into managing flight anxiety. Listen to therapy for black girls on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Culture eats strategy for breakfast. I would love for you to share your breakdown on pivoting. We feel sometimes, like we're leaving a part of us behind when we enter a new space, but we're just building.

On a recent episode of Culture Raises Us, I was joined by Volusia Butterfield, media founder, political strategist, and tech powerhouse for a powerful conversation on storytelling, impact, and the intersections of culture and leadership. I am a free black woman who worked really hard to be able to say that. I'd love for you to break down. Why was so important for you to do, see you can't win as something you didn't create. The Obama White House to Google to the Grammys, Belicia's journey is a masterclass in shifting culture

and using your voice to spark change. A very fake, capital-driven environment and society will have a lot of people tell half-truths. I'm telling you, I'm on the energy committee. Like, if the energy is not right, we're not doing it, whatever that it is. Listen to Culture raises us on the iHeart radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. All right, we're talking about the nanograph results unveiled this week, which are big news,

because I guess it lets us see another part of the universe we couldn't see before, right? That's right. It lets us listen to things going on out there that we couldn't hear before, specifically the mergers of supermassive black holes, which are already things we don't understand very well. Yeah, I mean, I think they're tied even to like the mystery of how galaxies form, right? because we sort of are not sure about that, right? We definitely don't understand how galaxies form and how they get these supermassive black holes

and why there are so many of them. The black holes at the hearts of galaxies are bigger than anybody expects and they're everywhere and they formed earlier in the universe than we understand. Cool. And so you talked to one of the scientists that worked on this. How excited was she?

She was very excited. She had bet her entire career since she was a graduate student on this project and now she's getting the payoff. Awesome. Well, here is Daniel's interview with Professor Kiara Mingarelli from Yale and the nanograph experiment. All right, so then it's my great pleasure to welcome to our program, Professor Kiara Mangarelli, a professor at Yale who works on nanograph. Kiara, thank you very much for joining us today.

Thank you so much. I'm so happy to be here. So tell me first, what is the basic item? idea of nanograph. How does keeping track of pulsars help you spot gravitational waves? So nanograv uses the galactic population of millisecond pulsars to look for gravitational waves. We can do this because millisecond pulsars are nature's best clocks. So they spin around about 100 times a second. Their masses are maybe one and a half times the mass of the sun. And they would fit inside Manhattan. So if you can imagine, Imagine taking the sun, shrinking it to the size of Manhattan and putting it in a blunder,

that is a millisecond pulsar. And there are ticks when they arrive at the Earth. So every time they spin around, they send a flash of radio waves to the Earth. And those flashes are so precise that we can time them to hundreds of nanoseconds over a decade. So they are very, very stable clocks. That point is really important because gravitational waves change the distance. between objects. And so as the gravitational wave transits the galaxy,

it will change the distance between the Earth and the pulsar. And so now those super stable radio flashes arrive early, and then they arrive late, as the gravitational wave transits through the galaxy. So a little bit early, and then a little bit late, and then a little bit early again. And so what we look for are those changes in the arrival times of the pulses

from these ultra-stable pulsars. That's how we can turn the whole galaxy into a gravitational wave detector. Awesome. Well, it sounds great in principle, but I'm sure in practice there are a lot of things to get right. What kind of like technical and data analysis challenges that you have to overcome to make this crazy idea work? So it's taken a lot of people, a lot of time,

to overcome all those challenges. In fact, we have some of the best people in the world working on the data analysis and the noise models because you're right. There's a lot of noise involved here. We can't walk over to our pulsars and turn them on and off again because we think something funny happened, right? One of the big challenges that we have is the interstellar medium. So the gas and dust between us and the pulsars, there are some maps of that that they're all very approximate. And this affects our signals because the radio waves and the pulses are dispersed by the interstellar medium. And that happens at different frequencies. radio frequencies. And so we have to take this signal that's then been spread out by the interstellar medium, and D, disperse it to make it, you know, a very clean signal again.

And so that can add some noise to what we're looking for. And unfortunately, that noise looks very similar to the gravitational wave signal that we're looking for. So we have to be very, very careful when we're making these noise models for the pulse of, models for the pulsars that we're not going one way or the other. That is to say that we're not taking a gravitational wave signal and thinking that it's just noise in our pulsar because they look so similar and therefore taking the signal away from any possible detection. And at the same time, we need to make sure that our signal models are good enough that we don't

mistake some noise for a possible signal. And so this right now is really, really important. getting those individual noise models correct for the pulsars is really, really important. So how do you distinguish between them? How do you know you're getting the noise right? So we can distinguish between the signal and the noise in a few ways. Number one, the gravitation wave background has some characteristic amplitude, and that's a function of the astrophysics of the source that's creating the signal. So if, for example, it's supermassive black holes, and we'll probably get to that in a second. But if, for example, it's that that's

creating the signal, then the amplitude of the signal is based on the astrophysics that governs their mergers. So how massive are the black holes? What gravitational wave frequency are they emitting at? How far away are they? How many supermassive black holes are there per unit redshift? So what's the density of black holes in the universe? And we know that that amplitude has a predicted and characteristic way of varying as a function of frequency. So we have lots of different frequency detector bins in our experiment, and we know exactly how much signal should be in each one of those bins from our simulations, and we can measure what's there.

And the way that the signal is distributed in those bins can be characteristic of, for example, supermassive black hole binaries generating the background. So that's one part of the puzzle. The second part is something called the Hellings and Downs curve. And so back when people were thinking in the 80s about how do we actually go about detecting a gravitational wave background, the zero-thorder thing to do, and I think a lot of us that have done undergraduate degrees in STEM fields have done, is a cross-correlation analysis where you say, all right, there's one signal in my data. So I'm going to take all of these different pieces of data and like bash them together

and see what signal is present in all of my different pieces of data. And so that's what we do with pulsar timing. We take all of these different time stamps from pulsars and cross-correlate them. And we look for the gravitational wave background signal. What's really interesting is that not only do you get this amplitude of the gravitational background that's correlated, but there's an additional geometric piece predicted by general relativity and that additional cross-correlation term varies as a function of angle between the pulsars and so if pulsars are close together they have a stronger correlation or stronger response to the

gravitational background if they're a little bit further away it gets weaker but then interestingly because gravitational waves have this quadrupolar shape which is like a cosine sort of shape the signal increases again right as they get further apart And so to create a signal that looks like that, that kind of cosine style shape, in addition to an amplitude, which is predicted by all of our simulations, that's impossible to fake. And that's what we've seen now in the nanograv data. So previously, we'd seen evidence for this amplitude, and it was so loud we had where we're scratching our heads for a hot second being like, can this be real or is this just noise? and we had to wait until we had this distinctive hellings and downs curve until we had evidence for that as well

because nothing can fake the hellings and downs curve the noise you know there could be unknown unknowns that just happened to be generating some sort of correlated noise and all of the pulsar signals we don't know but we do know for sure that this distinctive quadripolar shape that's the result of this hellings and downs curve can't be faked so having those two things at the same time makes us very confident that what we're seeing now is evidence for the gravitational wave background.

Do you feel like you have to be extra careful about these claims in the wake of the Bicep 2 debacle? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. And I feel like as a collaboration, we've done a really great job at being very conservative. When we first found the hint that what we were seeing was a gravitation wave background, back in 2020, we were very careful to say

that this could be the first part of the signal, but we're certainly not saying that we've seen the whole signal, and this is certainly not any kind of evidence for the gravitational wave background, but heck, it's sure interesting, and we're going to keep timing the data, and we'll let you know when something cool happens. So another part of why we're so confident that this is evidence for the gravitational wave background

is that not only have we seen the signal, But so have the Europeans. So in Europe, they have their own pulsar timing array. And in Australia, they have a pulsar timing array. And in India, they have a pulsar timing array. And so far, we've all been seeing consistent signals. Yeah, there's different levels of evidence for the signal, depending on the data set. But these data sets are all different.

They have different systematics. They're taken with different telescopes. hopes. We use some similar analysis tools that we're now even having independent analysis tools for the pulsars. And so this makes us all very confident that what we're seeing has to be real. So why did you choose this as your particular slice of physics to pursue? Doesn't it seem quite a risky bet for a young researcher? Oh, yes. When I was even younger, I had a lot of professors tell me why I was wasting my time, looking for low-frequency gravitational waves. And even, you know, I've been doing this work since 2010.

That's when I started working on pulsar timing rays in graduate school. And, you know, even then working on LIGO was risky. I, in fact, started my life as a LIGON and did a lot of work in helping to develop something called LOW. And that was terrible for me. And my professor at the University of Birmingham, my supervisor, Alberto Vecchio, was like, well, maybe you want to do something with pulsar timing arrays. And I was like, oh, I don't know, let's think about it.

So the idea of a pulsar timing array of having nature create a gravitational wave detector for you, if you're just clever enough to use it, really blew my mind. It was such a beautiful idea that I thought, you know, this is really the experiment for me. And I also felt like at the time that it was risky to join a collaboration that had a lot of the theoretical predictions already in place. And at the time, Pulsar timing arrays didn't have some of the fundamental papers that have now been written that I've helped to write. And so I felt like it was maybe less of a risk. I don't know, it depends on how you look at it. But it was risky for sure to go into a field when it was very exotic, even compared to LIGO,

which at the time was also exotic, right? So it was writing down the equations, trusting that the math was right, and then just kind of looking at nature, hoping that the merger rates would comply, because there's really nothing you can do, like even if you have the perfect instrument. If supermassive black holes never merge, you're not going to find a signal, right? So you're right, it was risky. And I had several people tell me that I should absolutely not be doing this, that it should definitely not be my focus.

But, I mean, it was good advice at the time, right? That if you're staking your career on something that isn't a proven technology yet, it's a big risk. I love the idea that we build a new kind of eyeball and we use it to look out into the universe, but we don't know what we're going to see. And in the case of LIGO and Virgo, they were lucky because there's so much. many more gravitational waves than people initially expected. What's the situation here? Are we surprised at the sort of amplitude of these gravitational waves? Is it more or less than we expected? I'm very surprised at the amplitude of the gravitational wave background. It is firmly twice as loud as I thought it

would be from my own models. So that's very surprising to me and delightful. I couldn't be happier. Thank you, universe. Exactly. Thank you. your universe for loving supermassive black holes as much as you love stellar mass black holes. But that's assuming that all of this signal is coming from these merging supermassive black holes. So I guess one thing that I haven't said yet is that the signal that we found evidence for is this gravitational wave background. And that comes from the cosmic merger history of supermassive black holes. So it's not one signal that we're looking for. It's this aggregate signal. It's the incoherent superposition of all of the supermassive black hole mergers that have

ever happened. So it's the total opposite of LIGO in so many ways. It's very low frequency. So frequencies of nanohertz. And if you're not used to thinking about nanohertz, one nanohertz is like an orbital period of 30 years. So these are very slowly orbiting supermassive black holes. And by supermassive, I mean a billion times the mass of the sun. Our signals are also very long-lived. So one of the reasons that there is this build-up of gravitational wave signals at very low frequencies is because the black holes evolve so slowly. Their mergers are so slow, they take about 25 million years to merge while emitting gravitational

waves. And so our signals are rare in terms of rates. One supermassive black hole binary system takes a whole galaxy merger to happen, right? And so that's not happening all the time everywhere you look. But the merger is so slow and the signals are so powerful. They're a million times stronger than what you can see in LIGO. But when they build up, they create this whopping loud signal that we can look for with pulse our timing arrays. So you say they're one million times more powerful than LIGO that's like at their source or does that factor in also their relative distance?

because they're further away also than what LIGO can see, right? So, I mean, those are slightly different questions. So when we talk about gravitational waves, our currency, the measurement that we use is the strain. And so that's how much are the gravitational waves changing space time, that you can think about that as a distance over distance or time over time because we have space time. So you can pick one.

So for LIGO, they can look for signals that have a strain that has a value of 10 to the minus 21. But what does that mean? That's something like that's the fraction of a size of a proton over the length of the detector. And I think that's the tagline that was very successful for them. For us, this is more like one meter per light year.

But what's the light year? I don't have a physical intuition for how long a light year is. And Americans are not good with meters. So I think that change in time over time is more intuitive. And so for us, the strain that we're looking for is 10 to the minus 15. So that's one part in a million billion.

And that's about 100 nanoseconds over a decade. So that's how much the gravitational waves are changing the spacetime fabric around us. And while one part in a million billion is incredibly small, it's still a million times louder than what LIGO is able to detect. I see. Yeah, that's the relevant comparison. Very cool. So you say that we can see this overall background hum and that we attribute it to supermassive

black holes, how do we know it's not also coming from like primordial gravitational waves from before the CMB, et cetera? That's a fantastic question. The answer is that we are not sure. In fact, there's a whole paper about, you know, exotic physics that we can now constrain with this amplitude of the gravitational wave background that we found. So one of the things that we'll do in the future is to try to characterize the gravitational wave background and to, you know, see how does the amplitude vary as a function of frequency? Right now, all of the sources that we know of vary in similar ways, right?

And the error bars will include all of your standard models, right? So right now we have, as our key targets are the prime suspects for sourcing this gravitational wave background. are supermassive black holes, first and foremost, you know, only the cosmic merger history of supermassive black holes, a cosmological or primordial gravitation wave background, and that is due to quantum fluctuations in the early universe that were then blown up

to the size of the whole universe, and then cosmic strings, which are these defects in the fabric of space-time. There's a matter-density spaghetti in the universe that are vanishingly small that can also create gravitational waves. Now, those three sources might all be contributing to this signal and might help to explain why it's so loud.

But it's not necessary to include them. But at the same time, right now, all of the predictions for how the amplitude of the signal varies as a function of frequency, they're all about minus one. They all have, like, this almost minus one slope. And that means that we won't be able to know for another, five years or so as to exactly what's happening and what's sourcing this background. Or at least we can say what is the primary source of this background. And that's not even to get into the fact that

it's still possible that there might be some noise that's leaking through the pulsars that's masquerading as some background amplitude when it's really noise. We know for sure that there is a background because we can see the Hellings and Downs curve and nothing else can fake that. So we know that it's not all noise, but we now need to figure out what's sourcing the signal and create, you know, better custom noise models for our pulsars to make sure that we completely, for the best of our ability, understand how the astrophysics of the signals propagating from the pulsar to the earth will affect things. So then what are the future prospects for nanograv? You talk about the next five years, is that gathering more pulsars or more analysis of the data

or combining with the other pulsar timing arrays on Earth? It's all of those things. It's all of those things. So the signal to noise that we measure with our experiment increases as the number of pulsars that we add and as the square root of the time. So it's really important to add more pulsars. One way of adding these new pulsars

is to go out and search for more pulsars. That's one thing that you can do and that's one thing we should absolutely be doing. The more immediate thing that we can do is to collaborate with our colleagues in Europe and Australia and India and China and South Africa and share our data and make these huge mega combined data sets that will give us immediately access to the southern hemisphere to all of those pulsars. And when we combine our data streams from all the individual pulsars, we'll get denser data sets. And that can make us much more sensitive to individual and spiraling superiors. massive black hole binaries. So now that we have evidence for the background, which to be honest is a foreground, it's what we were looking for. It's not a nuisance. That was the thing. Now it will

be a background. Now it'll be a source of noise that we're trying to get rid of. And so what's underneath, right? Well, there'll be some anisotropy in the gravitational wave background, similar to the cosmic microwave background. We'll be able to make maps of the gravitational wave universe. And what I'm really excited for is when we find some sort of gravitational wave hotspot on one of those maps. And there's no galaxy, right? Like what happens if there's gravitational waves that are coming from a place where there's no known galaxies? That's when I think things just start to get really interesting. So stuff like that could be right around the corner. And that's super exciting. We can also do tests of general relativity. So general relativity, pretty

to gravitational wave polarizations. So just like light, you know, we have plus and cross polarizations with gravitational waves, but extensions to general relativity predict even more polarizations. Like, for example, there could be a breathing mode. So instead of gravitational waves stretching and squashing the fabric of spacetime, like a plus or a cross, it breathed. So all of the space time, you know, goes out like you're taking a big breath and then collapses in on itself. like a balloon, getting bigger and then getting smaller again.

Great. Well, this is very exciting. Congratulations. And thanks very much for taking some time to chat with me today. Thank you very much. I just want to really emphasize that nanograph is an experiment that's been taking data for 15 years. And it's taken a team of 100 astrophysicists to get this result. So it's a huge, huge experiment taking a lot of time and a lot of.

of money and it's just part of this global effort to detect gravitational waves. So I really want to give a shout out to my colleagues all over the world. I started my career in Europe, right? So I was part of the European Pulsar timing array for many years. And I've written papers with the Parks Pulsar timing array in Australia. And, you know, of course, many papers of nanograph here in the US and in Canada. So I just want to mention that this is a huge experiment that's taken decades to get to where it's at right now. Absolutely. And I love when scientists from all over the world can come together to make a project bigger than any one scientist. Absolutely. Well, congratulations again and thanks for joining us. Thank you so much. Awesome. Pretty exciting. It must be nice when an experiment you worked on for so long, it pays off and potentially changes how we see the universe.

Yeah, I love the bit where she says the people warrant her not to work on this experiment because it was such a long shot. do you wish you had maybe listen to that advice or somebody had giving you that advice no i'm pretty happy with where i ended up but i'm just glad that somebody's out there swinging for the fences and trying to discover crazy things about the universe one of my favorite things about this discovery is that it was a surprise you know that they're seeing supermassive black hole gravitational waves at like twice the amplitude that they expected the universe is louder in supermassive massive black hole gravitational waves than we thought. Yeah, sort of the same thing happened with LIGO, right?

Like there are more of these events, or at least we could listen to more of these events than we thought was possible or actually happening. Yeah, we have an episode coming up about how surprising it was that LIGO saw so many black hole mergers when they did. And in this case, also, we were sort of lucky. The universe was louder to our new kind of ear than we even dared hope. The universe is out in a field, screaming with joy and gravity. And finally, we're able to listen.

All right. Well, congrats to the scientists at Nanagrav. And congrats, I guess, to all of us, right? It's humanity opening up a new eyeball into the universe. That's right. And hearing new kinds of physics going on out there. Hopefully in the future as Nanograv and their international partners stitched together their data into a massive data set

and collect more pulsars, we can learn even more things about gravitational waves from the early universe and maybe even figure out how this whole crazy universe came to be. And why it's in the middle of a field, screaming for joy or not. That might be a different experiment. All right, well, we hope you enjoyed that. Thanks for joining us. See you next time. to your favorite shows. December 29th, 1975, LaGuardia Airport. The holiday rush, parents hauling luggage,

kids gripping their new Christmas toys. Then, everything changed. There's been a bombing at the TWA. terminal, just a chaotic, chaotic scene. In its wake, a new kind of enemy emerged, terrorism. Listen to the new season of Law and Order Criminal Justice System on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. From tips for healthy living to the latest medical breakthroughs, WebMD's Health Discovered

podcast keeps you up to date on today's most important health issues through in-depth conversations with experts from across the health care community, WebMD reveals how today's health news will impact your life tomorrow. It's not that people don't know that exercise is healthy. It's just that people don't know why it's healthy, and we're struggling to try to help people help themselves and each other. Listen to WebMD Health Discovered on the IHeart Radio app or wherever you get your podcasts. Do we really need another podcast with a condescending finance brof trying to tell us how to spend our own money? No, thank you. Instead, check out Brown Ambition.

Each week, I, your host, Mandy Money, gives you real talk, real advice with a heavy dose of I-feel uses, like on Fridays when I take your questions for the BAQA. Whether you're trying to invest for your future, navigate a toxic workplace, I got you. Listen to Brown Ambition on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcast. This is an IHeart podcast.